iLounge

1

well, i’m sure all three of the people who are willing to drop $600 on this silly thing will enjoy it

Posted by apple dude on January 1, 2006 at 10:40 PM (PST)

2

I really have no idea what to say about this… it’s intresting I guess.. I don’t think I would ever buy it. but it looks..fun? Who knows… this may be the wave of the future.

Posted by Dawn Marie in New York City on January 2, 2006 at 12:00 AM (PST)

3

WE ARE BORG.  RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.

Posted by Locutus on January 2, 2006 at 1:35 AM (PST)

4

Well, it’s a lot cheaper than a 105-inch LCD TV would cost, if such were even available…

Three questions:

1) How good is 320x240 gonna look on a 105-inch display?

2) What kind of connection is available?  Will it work on Palm devices?

3) Why only one eye?  To me that’s what kills this product, since people by and large prefer to watch movies with both eyes…

Posted by cheap guy on January 2, 2006 at 2:04 AM (PST)

5

anyone remember virtual reality??

Posted by fp on January 2, 2006 at 2:17 AM (PST)

6

I WANT ONE, only I want it with 2 screens.

Posted by Joshdude in Long Beach, CA on January 2, 2006 at 2:29 AM (PST)

7

I’m with cheap guy. Low resolution doesn’t get any better just beacuse you increase the size. It better have standard connectors too, and monocular… well that’s just half the game. I would guess the idea is to be able to use it on the go where you may want to see what’s going on around you. Too bad people will break a lot of ankles trying to get used to walking without stereoscopic vision… *g*
Idea: Shape these into some cool (*not* oakley cool) shades with adjustable see-through (like Sony’s Glasstron). There you go for cool applications.

Posted by Bad Beaver on January 2, 2006 at 2:34 AM (PST)

8

I have to admit that I’m interested. If this thing can keep what it promises, it should be cool - nevertheless, I would never consider buying this with only one eye. Also, I would only use this in hotel rooms or wherever, but not in public. It just looks to silly - on the other side, mabye in ten years everybody wears such a thing in trains or on the beach ...

Posted by Lars on January 2, 2006 at 3:01 AM (PST)

9

Um, head mounted displays aren’t new, and aren’t this expensive.

http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=GVD300-N&cpc=SCH&srm=0
Virtual Reality Head Mounted LCD Display

So, I don’t get this company’s angle.  It doesn’t even look good.

Posted by gordy on January 2, 2006 at 3:53 AM (PST)

10

Military.  $600.  Oh, now I get it.

Posted by sumdummy on January 2, 2006 at 4:40 AM (PST)

11

This thing looks a bit geeky!

Posted by evoGage on January 2, 2006 at 5:45 AM (PST)

12

“Military.”

Well, if they can use helicopter blade films for iPod scratch protection…

So, how much is the night vision option?  Or how about the remote head motion machine gun guidance operation (RHMMGGO in military procurement circles, apparently).

Personally, I think I’ll wait until the direct-wired-to-the-optic-nerve designs become available.

Posted by flatline response on January 2, 2006 at 5:47 AM (PST)

13

Is it really only 320x240?  I can’t find
any specification. 

When somebody can make such a device in
1920x1080, it will revolutionize the
computing industry.

Posted by George on January 2, 2006 at 10:10 AM (PST)

14

The guy talking about 320x240 meant the iPod resolution, I think. Of course, you should encode your video to a higher resolution when watching it with this this. Again: If this someday really gives the possibilty to watch with BOTH eyes in a relaxed way (and hopefully a lower price), I’m on bord!

Posted by Lars on January 2, 2006 at 10:33 AM (PST)

15

Give it some time folks. The future is in expanding the size of these small units and this company has shown the way.

Posted by chuck on January 2, 2006 at 11:04 AM (PST)

16

Can the iPod *put out* higher res video?

Posted by Bad Beaver on January 2, 2006 at 11:15 AM (PST)

17

“1) How good is 320x240 gonna look on a 105-inch display?”

I’m sure it would look the same quality as the iPod puts out on it’s screen, as this is not an actual 105 inch screen. It would just “appear” to be a 105 inch display.

Posted by Robototobor on January 2, 2006 at 11:46 AM (PST)

18

Bad Beaver: Yeah, it can - higher resolutions are possible even on the current 5G (not on the iPod screen itself, I guess, but if you plug it to a TV). I’m sure the video specifications will get better already with the next generation. In my opinion, there’ll definitely be a 16:9-iPod in the future. Hope it won’t take too long ...

Posted by Lars on January 2, 2006 at 11:48 AM (PST)

19

im gona have to buy two then, one for each eye

muahahahahahahahahaha

Posted by keef on January 2, 2006 at 3:14 PM (PST)

20

I knew something like this would come out. Considering they have sunglasses for lap tops that show the screen on them, something like this is possible. However, this looks really stupid and ugly and for $600 I’d rather buy another iPod. Why do people waste their time making such things?

Posted by PimpyMicPimp on January 2, 2006 at 3:15 PM (PST)